BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//Department of Linguistics - UCLA - ECPv6.17.4.1//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-WR-CALNAME:Department of Linguistics - UCLA
X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://linguistics.ucla.edu
X-WR-CALDESC:Events for Department of Linguistics - UCLA
REFRESH-INTERVAL;VALUE=DURATION:PT1H
X-Robots-Tag:noindex
X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT1H
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:America/Los_Angeles
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0800
TZOFFSETTO:-0700
TZNAME:PDT
DTSTART:20240310T100000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0700
TZOFFSETTO:-0800
TZNAME:PST
DTSTART:20241103T090000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0800
TZOFFSETTO:-0700
TZNAME:PDT
DTSTART:20250309T100000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0700
TZOFFSETTO:-0800
TZNAME:PST
DTSTART:20251102T090000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:-0800
TZOFFSETTO:-0700
TZNAME:PDT
DTSTART:20260308T100000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:-0700
TZOFFSETTO:-0800
TZNAME:PST
DTSTART:20261101T090000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Los_Angeles:20250411T110000
DTEND;TZID=America/Los_Angeles:20250411T140000
DTSTAMP:20250402T183042Z
CREATED:20240815T163542Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250402T183042Z
UID:439913-1744369200-1744380000@linguistics.ucla.edu
SUMMARY:Colloquium Talk - Ginny Dawson
DESCRIPTION:Rethinking classifier languages\n\nClassifier languages have long been of interest to formal semanticists. That such languages do not allow nouns to be modified directly by numerals have lead researchers to propose a significant degree of cross-linguistic variation between classifier and non-classifier languages in either noun meaning (e.g. Chierchia 1998) or numeral meaning (e.g. Krifka 1989\, Bale & Coon 2014). Classifier languages\, on this view\, show fundamental semantic differences from non-classifier languages. In this talk\, I challenge this notion by examining the behavior of nouns and numerals in Tiwa\, a Tibeto-Burman language of India. I argue that despite having the properties of a typical classifier language\, nouns and numerals in Tiwa can and should be analyzed as having the same sorts of meanings as nouns and numerals in non-classifier languages like English. I argue that the differences between languages like Tiwa and English are largely morphosyntactic\, and that this morphosyntactic variation is expected given standard assumptions about the syntax and semantics of nouns\, numerals\, and number marking. Most centrally\, I argue that (sortal) classifiers in Tiwa are overt realizations of a morpheme that creates a predicate out of a degree-denoting numeral; a function which is often assumed to be a type-shift in languages like English (Bylinina & Nouwen 2020). What seem like major differences between the two languages\, then\, does not reflect fundamental semantic variation in noun or numeral meaning\, but is exactly the sort of morphosyntactic variation we expect to see. I conclude by looking at the typological picture more broadly\, examining the ways languages are predicted to differ based on the dimensions of variation I identify. \nLocation: Royce Hall 362
URL:https://linguistics.ucla.edu/event/colloquium-talk-ginny-dawson/
CATEGORIES:Colloquium
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=America/Los_Angeles:20250425T110000
DTEND;TZID=America/Los_Angeles:20250425T140000
DTSTAMP:20250410T165813Z
CREATED:20240815T163518Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20250410T165813Z
UID:439914-1745578800-1745589600@linguistics.ucla.edu
SUMMARY:Colloquium Talk - Tanya Bondarenko
DESCRIPTION:Lessons about clausal embedding from long-distance wh-dependencies  \nAbstract: In this talk I argue with the data from Georgian that syntax and semantics of long-distance wh-dependencies provide support for the view that many embedded clauses are adjuncts (syntactically) and modifiers (semantically) rather than arguments of verbs they combine with (Elliott 2017\, Bochnak & Hanink 2021\, Bondarenko 2022\, a.o.). Georgian is a language that has wh-movement within matrix clauses (Borise 2023)\, but lacks wh-movement out of embedded CPs (Harris 1981). I examine in detail both restrictions on wh-movement\, and alternative strategies of building long-distance wh-dependencies\, and argue that explanations for both need the assumption that embedded clauses at hand are not true arguments of the verb. \nFirst\, I argue that restrictions on wh-movement in Georgian are an instance of the Williams Cycle effect (Williams\, 2003\, 2011; Meadows 2023\, Poole 2023\, Egressy 2024\, a.o.): unlike in languages like English\, wh-movement in Georgian targets a syntactic projection lower than CP\, and this is why it cannot cross a CP boundary. I show that this constraint is part of a broader seize-locality generalization\, and propose that Meadows’ (2023) approach to Williams Cycle is best suited to account for it. An implication of this is that (most) embedded clauses have to be adjuncts: a crucial part of the proposal is that clausal embedding involves featurally free instances of external Merge. \nSecond\, I show that Georgian has three alternative strategies of building long-distance wh-dependencies (wh-scope marking\, prolepsis with a gap\, prolepsis with wh-doubling)\, and none of them involve cross-clausal movement (cf. Dayal 1994\, 2000\, a.o.). I make a proposal of how to build the meanings of these long-distance questions compositionally from clauses with regular wh-syntax. A crucial assumption of this proposal is that embedded clauses restrict the propositional content of the matrix eventuality\, implying that embedded clauses under consideration are modifiers of the verb. \n  \nLocation: Royce Hall 362
URL:https://linguistics.ucla.edu/event/colloquium-talk-tanya-bondarenko/
CATEGORIES:Colloquium
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR